I have guy here going to court on the 13th of May and this article seems to say cardrooms are about to take a serious hit. Would be nice to get some help from national. Anyway everyone should check this out.
Poker Players Alliance Forums » Poker Players Alliance
It's getting hot in Phoenix
(4 posts)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
According to what I read if he is in fact collecting a fee and % from the players and the rooms he promotes he is in fact breaking the law. The only possible loophole was if the fee per player went to pay the dealers. If he goes to jail its his own fault.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Folks, "national" has been aware of this situation and has talked with many of the persons involved several times. The reason the national PPA is not providing legal defense here is simple: Arizona law DOES NOT distinguish between games of chance and games of skill, if it did, then there would be no reason for Judge Lee or anyone else running a card room to structure the way they make money as they do.
Arizona law contains the following provision: "4. "Gambling " or "gamble " means one act of risking or giving something of value for the opportunity to obtain a benefit from a game or contest of chance OR SKILL or...."
Thus the "skill v. chance" argument will not be a part of any litigation over these card rooms as the gambling law applies to both games of chance AND games of skill. "Skill v. chance" may well be an important POLITICAL point in AZ, but not a legal one.
What will be the issue in litigation, if there is any, is whether the card rooms have correctly structured themselves so that they fall under the "social gaming" exception to the law.
The PPA's Litigation Support Network considers that a purely local issue, to be resolved by Arizona lawyers and Arizona courts.
If there is a push to change the law in the Legislature, the national PPA may well choose to get involved in that, but so far I am not aware of any proposed legislation to change the current law.
The Arizona PPA should show its public support of the rooms, of course, and the right to play poker generally, but there is really little special expertise that the PPA's lawyers can bring to this situation. If there was, we would be there.
Patrick "Skallagrim" Fleming
PPA Litigation Support Director.Posted 1 year ago # -
I just have to LOL at this one.. Harold gets all excited when an article is being written about him, there is all of these expectations, bragging, etc etc and then when it comes time for the big day, its one big letdown...
I know Harold pretty well, we used to talk regularly but that has since ceased for reasons I just dont want to get into..
I honestly think Phx will be fine.. There are quite a few card rooms that are doing good but I am sure if things do take a turn for the worse, they will Blame Harold for the issues. I just wish he would keep his mouth shut and just work behind the scenes trying to get some sort of legislation worked out or whatever.. He for sure is his own worst enemy.......
Yes Patrick you are absolutely correct in saying we are NOT a skill vs. chance state.. Harolds stance is we are excempt from the law because Poker is a "Sport" and "the sport of poker’s transactions(the pot) are valid under (and subject to) the Law of Contracts" as quoted from his website.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.